Category: Uncategorized

1936: Lebensraum(help·info) (German for “habitat” or literally “living space“) was one of the major genocidal political ideas of Adolf Hitler, and an important component of Nazi ideology. It served as the motivation for the expansionist policies of Nazi Germany, aiming to provide extra space for the growth of the German population, for a Greater Germany. In Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, he detailed his belief that the German people needed Lebensraum (“living space”, i.e. land and raw materials), and that it should be found in Eastern Europe. It was the stated policy of the Nazis to kill, deport, or enslave the Polish, Ukrainian, Russian, and other Slavic populations, whom they considered inferior, and to repopulate the land with Germanic people. The entire urban population was to be exterminated by starvation, thus creating an agricultural surplus to feed Germany and allowing their replacement by a German upper class.

2012: Imposing policies which effectively force single people, small families, divorced, bereaved or mentally/physically disabled from larger Council/Housing Association houses: ie, forcing anyone receiving Benefits from their homes by changing Housing Benefit Rules in order to impose a burden of payment for unoccupied rooms – is, in effect, identical to the effect of disempowering, dispossessing and removing any right of freedom.

2012: The core issue to identify slavery or slave-labour in this situation is that: – Slaves can be held against their will. Slaves can be deprived of the right to refuse work or to leave without penalty. This Government has imposed a de-facto state of ‘debt-bondage‘ upon all those who are unable to work through impairment, disability or simple unemployment. That is Slavery!

The debt-bondage is held by the Government and is enforced in the form of “sanctions” – these ‘sanctions’ deprive a citizen of part or all of their benefits for a supposed infraction or breaking of imposed rigidly-applied ‘rules.’ Alongside this, it is made plain (though the threat is somewhat ambiguously stated publicly) that refusal to do ‘x’ or ‘y’ will result in sanctions being applied. This is State Indenture and another ‘de-facto’ form of enslavement. The final form of enslavement is much more insidious, for it calls upon the citizen to ‘volunteer’ to their own enslavement. There is no definitively explicit ‘punishment’ for not Volunteering, but it is ‘suggested’ that sanctions may be applied for some other supposed infringement. This too is a de-facto form of enslavement popularized in Third World Dictatorships – because through the threat of some ‘other’ punishment other than death (rather by threat of mutilation or amputation) , young boys and men were pressed into becoming pro-dictatorship ‘guerillas.’ The example may seem exaggerated, but its effect is the same – even in non-lethal circumstances.

1936: The expression comes from the title of a novel by German philologist Lorenz Diefenbach, Arbeit macht frei: Erzählung von Lorenz Diefenbach (1873), in which gamblers and fraudsters find the path to virtue through labour.[2] The phrase was also used in French (“le travail rend libre!”) by Auguste Forel, a Swiss ant scientist, neuroanatomist and psychiatrist, in his “Fourmis de la Suisse” [“Ants of Switzerland”] (1920).[3] In 1922, the Deutsche Schulverein of Vienna, an ethnic nationalist “protective” organization of Germans within the Austrian empire, printed membership stamps with the phrase Arbeit macht frei. It was adopted in 1928 by the Weimar government as a slogan extolling the effects of their desired policy of large-scale public works programmes to end unemployment. This use of the phrase was continued by the Nazi Partywhen it came to power in 1933.

Raised over the entrance to Auschwitz I where, according to BBC historian Laurence Rees in his “Auschwitz: a New History”, the sign was erected by order of commandant Rudolf Höss.

At Buchenwald, “Jedem das Seine” (literally, “to each his own”, but idiomatically “everyone gets what he deserves”) was used.

In The Kingdom of Auschwitz, Otto Friedrich wrote regarding Höss:

He seems not to have intended it as a mockery, nor even to have intended it literally, as a false promise that those who worked to exhaustion would eventually be released, but rather as a kind of mystical declaration that self-sacrifice in the form of endless labour does in itself bring a kind of spiritual freedom.[8]

2012: Minister for Work And Pensions Ian Duncan-Smith uses the phrase “Work makes you free..” (Ger. Arbeit Macht frei..) during a BBC Radio Four interview.. protesting that what he ‘means’ is that “any kind of work makes you feel freer, more empowered, more a part of society..” However, in the light of policies Ian Duncan-Smith imposed upon those in receipt of all manner of State Benefits (and in particular those who have had their ‘disabilities’ or ‘sicknesses’ assessed under outsourcing to ATOS (a private medical company based in France) through the Work Capability Assessment, the suggestion has been made that IDS meant his ‘Work makes Freedom’ comment in the ‘literary’ sense, and that the Minister for Work & Pensions was actually alluding to the notion that he was suggesting that most unemployed, disabled and sick people were/are “gamblers and fraudsters” who “require to find the path to virtue through labour!”Probably the most scurrilous allusion any Minister has ever suggested under the mask of a supposedly “compassionate nature.”

If such historical remarks, references, comments, political policies and social policies are to be continually invoked by this Coalition – I have only one question?

Just how much of ‘Meine Kampf’ has this Government decided to ‘borrow’ from?

It seems that the Welfare Reform Bill will act to do more than just cut the level of benefits for “the most vulnerable.” For amongst the Government’s wide-ranging enactments is one which seems less insidious than it really is. This is the part of the Bill which seeks to change existing Housing Benefit Rules.

It is called the ‘Under-occupancy’ article and plaintively states that, if a Housing Association or Council Tenant occupies a dwelling with more bedrooms than actual occupants. They must forfeit a proportion of their Housing Benefit for each of the ‘unoccupied’ rooms. This ostensibly means that a man or woman occupying a two bedroomed house after a spouse has died, or a parent occupying a three bedroomed house after their children have left and they have divorced will be forced to ‘downsize’ or will have to pay a penalty – approx. £14.00 per unoccupied bedroom.This might seem ‘reasonable’ to the Taxpayer, but, its consequences are only just visible, and for those who are yet to experience redundancy and a huge cut in salary and therefore, living standards – it is one of the most vicious pieces of legislation to have been passed into Law!

So. Government have enacted a policy which will – in its ultimate expression, create ‘economic ghettoes’ populated by families who have perhaps lost a parent, parents who have children who have gone to University, single people who have divorced and other benefits claimants who have been dispersed from their original dwelling.

However, this is not the whole story, because in the course of my own enquiries about the possibility of moving to a two-bedroomed house elsewhere in the City I found that, though an unwritten rule, one cannot move from an area of lower Local Council Tax to an area of Higher Local Council Tax even if one is actually ‘downsizing.’ This ridicules the whole notion of ‘social mobility’ highlighted by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. In fact, what it means in real terms is that anyone unfortunate enough to be either unemployed, sick, disabled or mentally disabled will find themselves confined, imprisoned and detained wiithin a clearly strictured set of Economic Ghettoes, from which there can neither be escape nor movement.

1. There can be no escape because the eg. ‘Post-Code’ associated with the address will always act as a disincentive to employers, banks and health authorities.

2. There can be no movement (except downwardly into homelessness and destitution) because it is made impossible for anyone who is ‘downsized’ to upgrade their living space by virtue of 1.

Of course, when applied at a National Level, the consequences of such a policy become clear. Large swathes of the North of England will soon become ‘dumping grounds’ for the South of England’s unemployed ( who are more likely to consist of ethnic minorities and large, nuclear families who have lived in poverty for most of their lives) , disabled and ill.

In conclusion.

This suggests that it has always been the hidden motivation and intention of the Coalition to create Economic Ghettoes consisting of families and individuals on Benefits who are unable to move to find work, to move socially or to even aspire to do so.

Families, single-people, the permanently disabled, the mentally disabled and ill and varying classes of the sick are all to be effectively ‘imprisoned’ in the North of England: while the South of England lives under the impression that the North is simply being punished by The Coalition and Parliament for its economic ‘weakness.’

In essence, those who are regarded as being ‘economically damaging’ to the expensive, high-standard of living and affluence (though not due purely to its own lack-of- industry) of the South of England will be essentially ‘repatriated’ to the cheaper, lower standard of living and(alas!) increasingly far less affluent North.

FYI. The proof and evidence of my assertion is already in the public domain, for Benefits Claimants in areas close by the newly constructed Olympic Stadium in Newham, London, were being forced by the Local Council to move to “smaller: more suitable properties” according to Tory Council Officials to an area in Halifax some 120 miles from the Capital as a beginning gambit and the opening move in what may yet become known as the “London Clearances..”

Britain is to be seggregated.

More significantly (but a question which Media Plaudits and Local Politicians seem to be unable or unwilling to ask)

What exactly does this mean for the Economic Survival of the North of England? Or is the North of England to be sacrificed as it was in the 1980’s in the Government’s destruction and wholesale dismantling of the Manufacturing, Mining and Steel Industries?

Is the North of England, (along with its rising population) going to be simply ignored: marginalized and patronized by the hectoring and condescension of austerity – mad Parliament?

Because, if the North of England’s unemployment figures (that is, those which have not been ‘massaged down’ by inclusion in Ian Duncan “Arbeit Macht Frei” Smith’s ‘Workfare’ figures. Work which has already been statistically proven to have no significant or relevant economic benefit or effect upon the GDP of the United Kingdom.) are effectively allowed to increase to the point where there are more than 500 applicants-per-post or the percentage of working-age adults on benefits passes beyond 15% – 17% of the population, economic recovery in the North will be made almost impossible for many years and possibly decades.

If central Government does nothing to improve and enable the economy of the North of England.. The North of England must take action and separate itself from the Westminster umbilical. The North must not become the dumping ground for those unfortunate enough that Parliament have decided they must no longer be allowed to live in London.

Thus David Cameron and Nick Clegg are both involved in creating a very British kind of ‘lebensraum’ (Ger. ‘Living-space.’) and we, as a Nation are plunged backwards into the true nineteen thirties nature and myopic intentions of this increasingly and fanatically self-obsessed and fascist, authoritarian, unyeildingly and unflinchingly ruthless Government.

A modern–day, 21st Century British Government who have ‘borrowed’ extensively the economic and social policies of Adolf Hitler! Once thought a ‘madman’ and ‘psychopath’ – now the model of Politics in Great Britain circa 2012.

This is surely the beginning of UK Wide – ‘ECONOMIC APARTHEIDT?’ (and worse…..)

The Un – Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

It is surely one of life’s myriad mysteries. Why does my toast always fall butter-side down? Why are my keys always in the last place I look? Why would any sane person vote ‘Tory?’ Yet perhaps the most compelling is the question – why, (according toBritish Gas Prepayment Meters,) Ten Pounds Sterling is not the same value as Ten Pounds Sterling anywhere else in the Country? “What do you mean by that,” I hear you cry. One cannot drive a car that is empty of petrol or diesel – yet, when the car finally dies out and one has to find a Petrol Station to fill one’s petrol/diesel tank, one is not charged by the petrol station for actually filling the vehicle. Once a full tank of petrol/diesel is emptied, there is nothing left. Similarly, when one is faced with paying a fixed sum for a fixed sum of Domestic Gas – one would suppose that all one was getting was a fixed sum of gas for a fixed sum of money.

What could be difficult about that? It’s hardly “Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle” – ‘You can know the position or the momentum of a sub-atomic particle, but you can’t know both..”

But you would be wrong. Very wrong.

Hidden amongst all the various statistical information about your Tariff and the estimated amount of gas you will use during the upcoming year, there is also hidden, a charge for not using their ‘Emergency Gas Credit.’ Yes. You heard that right – a charge is levied for not using an emergency supply of gas, made available to you in case you ‘run out’ of Gas!? Just in case that may have passed you by, it is like you paying for petrol you have not used – but could. The onus here is on the idea of one being ‘facilitated’ – that is, permitted to have the use of, over and above the actual amount of Gas purchased. This means that, if in the course of a week, one runs out of Gas (and, for whatever reason may not have sufficient funds to purchase more) there is a facility for being able use an ’emergency supply’ which will last for a fixed period of time (usually two or three days at current energy prices.) Of course, in the event of actually using the emergency supply, one has not only to pay back the amount used in ’emergency’ but also to ‘top-up’ one’s Gas above and beyond the emergency amount used.

It is at this point things become a little more ‘ephemeral’ – perhaps even ‘supernatural.’ One expects to pay back a debt one has accrued for the use of a service or entitlement afforded to one. But, according to British Gas (though it is by no means clarified anywhere among the tomes of ‘information’ they proffer on their website) there is also a charge for not taking advantage of their ‘Emergency Supply.’ Indeed, one will find that almost as soon as one runs – out of Gas – one is immediately charged for not ‘topping-up’ one’s Gas beforehand. In fact, it could be reasonably argued that British Gas effectively punish one for having the gall: the singular temerity, the bare-faced affrontery, the sheer insolence and cheek of not topping up one’s Gas long before you ‘decided’ to run out, andnot using their ’emergency gas supply’ so generously afforded to you through the goodness of their charitable benevolence.

This means you can know the amount of Gas you are using, by the rate at which a fixed sum runs out, or you can know which Tarriff you are on and estimate accordingly – but, you can’t accurately know both..

The fact that one is also least likely to run up huge debts through overuse, a massive or disproportionate ‘Carbon Footprint’ and that one is frugally, responsibly and carefully monitoring and using a very limited amount of energy seems to fill British Gas with anything but admiration or gratitude. In fact, those who pay British Gas (and any/all of the ‘umbrella’ energy corporations – ie. different names: same prices.. or, as I like to call it, “what they all lose in Gas Supply they will all inevitably gain in Electricity Supply” (that is, ‘we.. will always lose to these cartels!’)

Those who pay for their Gas through a Pre-payment Meter are being charged at far higher prices for their Energy than those who pay by Direct Debit. Why?

Believe it or not, it is to do with the risk of being charged by Banks and the Utilities for a Direct Debit failure. This is how those who pay by Direct Debit are also ripped off, yet, proportionately, if you are one who pays up to 40% of your money (whether through Low Income, Tax Credits or even Benefits) then every single penny makes a difference. Direct Debit failures are more expensive on individual occasions. The rip-off that is happening with prepayment meters is constant and growing!

It just doesn’t add up!

Tarriffs are a pain. One needs a degree in mathematics to accurately work out exactly how much Gas one is actually using. Beyond crunching the numbers through a supercomputer, I defy anyone to ‘mentally’ work out their annual amount of gas. Tarriffs are split into two classes: the first (expensive) Tarriff A says that a fixed number of kilowatt hours must be used before (cheaper by half) Tarriff B operates: that is, [the ‘estimated’ amount of energy used in one hour (by what? A kettle? central heating? gas-fired kiln?) is charged] – usually at twice the price of Tarriff B! The Mathematic values used to explain the charges different Tarriffs incur is mind-bogglingly complex.

Not because the Maths is too hard to comprehend: but because the formula that are used to create the tarriffs in the first place are unknown to the General Public (ie You and Me!)

We know that Empirically/Metrically that a ‘Pound of Sugar’ is (pretty much) a ‘pound of Sugar’ – mainly because there are Governing Public Bodies – responsible for the estimation and standardization of weights and measures, and a whole raft of legislation covering everything from the specific gravity of Alcohol to volumes of milk that constitute both the Empirical ‘Gallon,’ and the European Metric ‘Litre.’ Yet no such standardization of volumes/partial pressures or cubic quantities have been expressly identified in the ‘estimates’ of any and/or, all of the Gas Suppliers. It seems that we are forced to take ‘on trust’ the specific mathematics that are used to create estimates and levels of Tarriffs.

This is not helped by ‘Standing Charges’ – yet another charge for not using Gas! Why standing charges are demanded from any of us is a mystery. It is just another ‘tax’ which the hard-pressed consumer is compelled to pay – even when they are not actually using their gas at all!!

One thing is sure.

One is expected to use a hell of a lot of gas before one can take advantage of the lower tarriff! (ie Tarriff ‘B’)

Couple that with having a fixed income and therefore fixed energy needs and one can see a glaring injustice in the calculation of Gas prices and the end supply costs to even the most frugal of consumers.

In conclusion.

Neither British Gas, nor any other Gas Supplier allows the most important function of the present-day need for energy conservation – that is: the ability for the ordinary consumer to ‘store’ required energy until such time they need or require it! Ten pounds of Gas is not Ten pounds of Gas – the likelihood is that from the time the Gas Supply runs-out, you will be charged for the length of time you have no Gas! (in my case £11.00 of Gas was immediately ‘charged’ and reduced to £10.64.. had I only been able to put £10.00 on my meter – I would have only had the true value of £9.64.. less than three days Gas Supply – at current rates.)

In no other circumstances does this happen. One is not charged by one’s Car, Motorcyle, Yacht, Aeroplane for not topping up one’s fuel/battery..

But there are ‘hidden charges’ appearing in all sorts of places – and they are increasing, especially in Banks Credit and Debit Card charges, and, there is now even a price to be paid for not using your phone/internet to pay bills.

The Utilities in general (and British Gas in particular) are constantly charging us for things wedon’t use..and increasing prices dramatically on those we do.

And we can’t switch it any of it off either – because they will charge us for trying to do so!…

Some people out there are real cowards. I mean “craven,” “yellow-belly,” “crawl-in-the-dust-for-the-rest-of-your-miserable-lives” cowards. Cowards that truly deserve to be air-dropped by Parachute (or not) into a truly life-threatening environment (Syria, Afghanistan,Iran) just to watch them defecate themselves with terror and crawl into a hole pulling the earth on top of them.

They know who they are.. and this is for them alone!

“You are the kind of person who is deceitful about small, insignificant things. Thinking yourself clever and cunning: you are (in your own mind) a real ‘survivor.’ You are desperate to be ‘liked’ and equally desperate to be feared. A paragon of useless virtues: shiny shoes, pressed trousers or slacks, cleaned fingernails, but hiding years of stored bitterness and envy: you are merely sycophantic and proud of ‘who’ you know – rather than what you have strived for, achieved… or maybe even tried and failed at! You want/need/must punish others for any and every imagined and petty infringement upon your ‘World’ – yet your experience and understanding of the world is so facile it could easily be mistaked for Edwin A. Abbott’s ‘Flat-Land.’ In fact, navigating ‘flat-land’ would be too much of an intellectual drain. You experience everything as an ‘affrontery’ to You. Nothing is too insignificant for your prurience or intolerance. You like to become involved in large groups: to hide in the strength of numbers and to ‘adopt’ their mantle. You strive to become anonymous: your sole ambition is to become utterly vicious in your anonimity: an anonimity you need to preserve at all costs!.You are the sneak theif. the silent bully. A parasitic mind bent on its own quiet supremacy.

You love to interfere in the lives of others. Meddling in matters that have nothing to do with you. Like the furtive paedophile, anxious at being discovered. You are careful to cover your tracks. You mistake this as some form of higher intelligence or that you are acting covertly like some military superbrain. You fantasize about being a super-criminal, feared and hated for your ruthless and pitiless nature: yet when confronted, you eschew all knowledge of wrongdoing and are terrified of blame or responsibility: all you want to do is run away and escape.

Many present-day TV Programmes like ‘Big Brother’, ‘Fame Academy’, ‘X Factor’ and ‘I’m A Celebrity..’ are made for individuals like you. For you love the overwhelming feeling of power that it gives you: even for a brief, fleeting moment – to advance or wreck the dreams and ambitions of others: this power excites you (perhaps even more than sex?) To mock and scorn the efforts of others when you, yourself remain utterly talentless and empty. Or perhaps you are talented: perhaps you have an overarching ability that compounds your intolerance and conceit? It might be that, for all your talents and abilities, they just don’t or will not coalesce – leaving you frustrated and bitter. Perhaps you are even a Professional with experience of hardship that you can’t wait to inflict upon others.. As a teacher, you prefer the “School of Hard Knocks” – although your own learning was fraught because of your own unwillingness to learn or plain stupidity, you like to ‘teach’ because that too fulfills some vague, unrealized notion of your own power. You don’t so much teach as indoctrinate – and only so far as your role as the ‘Master’ remains incontestable. Little wonder your ambitions are as hollow as your ‘professionalism.’ For when the mask slips, and the true face of your abilities is glimpsed – it is like the curtain moving – revealing the machinery behind The Great and All-Powerful Oz!

‘Secret Voting’, that’s what you like!..All from the comfort of a well-upholstered armchair or sofa: the spiritual pursuit of an idle, evil, narrow little mind. It wouldn’t be so bad if you had the courage to challenge those around you – to disagree once-in-a-while, but you’re too slavish for that. After all, you are ‘one of them..’ aren’t you? At least, until they tire of your presence. You are the eternal ‘hanger-on’ :the last invited to parties, But you don’t like to be told what to do, to be contradicted or challenged in any way and you get your own back in small and petty ways. Waiting until your ‘friends’ backs are turned or they are pre-occupied in some other way: a little petty damage, a scratch on a new TV screen, a remote control that no longer works, a broken vase or wine glass – nothing too expensive, let’s them know just who is ‘Boss’. Moreoften though, it is the kind of damage that is seldom immediately found and takes days, perhaps even months to become noticed. You may even innocently point out the unnoticed damage yourself, revelling in the knowledge that it was you.. all the while wanting to shout at your ‘hapless’ friend:

“Hey, thicko! F*cking stupid arse! It was ME all the time – I damaged your property! Or, you may want to boast: I f*cked up your chances of joining the Darts Team, I scratched the paintwork on your new front door – under your f*cking nose too! You can’t catch me, I’m too clever for you. I have ALWAYS been too clever for you!”

How ironic it is that you are so well loved by those same friends.. for now.

You relish the idea, the notion that you can do these things and worse and still smile affectionately, reassuringly, offering the hand of friendship to your unknowing victim.You may justify youself with whatever limpid excuses you think apply.. “Cruel to Be Kind..” or even “Cruel to be Cruel..” It doesn’t matter – both are the instruments of your own undoing.

You claim accolades and achievements that are not yours or mock the hard won achievements of others, won by their hard toil, hours of labour and a determined devotion to their work – suggesting that you too could easily do the same – yet showing no ability, aptitude or inner strength to do so. Those you cannot challenge, you defame: those you cannot beat, you undermine with half-truths and well placed lies. Those you admire, you seek to destroy. Those you cannot compete against you dismiss.

Psychologists call you a “Malignant Narcissist.”

And now you lend your malice to politics and meddle in the lives and concerns of others in mortal and incalculable ways. It was people like YOU who voted through (or did not oppose) the Welfare Reform Act which will now destroy very many disabled people in all manner of guises (bodied, mental illness, disabled) and it is YOU and your kind who will, no doubt, meddle further to create greater numbers of dispossessed and impoverished.For you are also those who write the foul rhetoric, publish the defamations and protest your innocence when you are caught – even ‘red-handed’ you still insist you are ‘Not Guilty..’

Ever and anon it has been like this.. You, escaping every snare, You, escaping every consequence andYou, escaping every judgement.. No more of that!..

The light is increasing and you will not be able to hide in your fetid darkness forever. One day – someday, sooner than you think, you will be found and dealt with, and all the malice and hatred you have secretly stored up will spill out leaving you bereft. Your punishment will be beyond excruciating and there will be no-one and nothing to prevent it. Because no-one will want you to escape this time..No amount of clever thinking, reckoning, estimation or appeal will prevent the machinery of humiliation crushing you into a sad, pathetic and completely exposed wretch.

So my advice is hide. Pull the World down upon yourself and hide in the rubble. Be like the cockroach we know you to be: lurking in shadows, feeding on excrement.

Precious Little “Charity”…

We have seen in recent months that much is being made of ‘Charities.’ For some rather unknown reason, many Charities seem to be in full possession of our private telephone and mobile numbers. In fact, many of them seem to be phoning us repeatedly, trying to get us to sign-up to whatever worthy cause they may represent. Yet stranger still, they appear, for all the world to be targeting those on the lowest incomes and those who are in receipt of benefits? Why is this? Look closer still and you will find that all manner of Charities are re-inventing themselves – but so are businesses and services too! Every large commercial company seems to be jumping on the ‘Charity’ bandwagon -whether Tesco, Sainsbury, Robinson’s, or just the Local Corner Shop: everyone is riding on the newest, most expansive ‘market.’ It couldn’t be for the huge Tax Breaks that Charities are afforded? With the paring to the bone of local services and community amenities, charities are stepping into the picture, promising all manner of possibilities. Yet, if we scratch beneath the surface we will find that, many of the so-called Charities are little more than another marketing ploy, and that their ‘charitable gifts’ are only to be afforded if everyone buys ‘x’ amount of their products or signs up to some loyalty card. The suggestion that Government Cuts can be, somehow, overcome through the intervention of ‘Charities’ is a fantasy: one perpetuated by the ridiculous and insolent notion of ‘The Big Society,’ a utopian ideology put forward by David Cameron, as if it was the ‘answer to the Universe and Everything.’ Coming from the very same Political Party who, under PM Margaret Thatcher declared “there is no such thing as ‘Society‘…” the very idea of the Conservatives giving a hoot (or even two) about the ‘great unwashed’ is as absurd as a Bullingdon Man not getting bloodied for putting some Oik firmly back in his Working Class place! No. The whole of Society is now infected with a Victorian Ethos: one based on “gratitude.” and by extension the re-emergence of the “status” of ‘Parish Charge,’ where the impoverished individual had virtually no autonomy.

Put simply: we are being returned to a time where the poor were ‘allowed‘ to live and through the actions (ie theChristian Generosity/Charity/Indulgence) of the Church Parishes, The Temperance Movement and Civic Bodies such as The Free masons, the Chamber of Commerce and Parish Committees – they were equally, never allowed to forget their lowly and tenuous place in life.

Reductio Ad Absurdam or The ‘Null Point Repudiation..’

It is said that almost ninety percent of the staff of the NHS are against the NHS Reform Bill. Yet for every person who is against the Bill, the Coalition seems determined to suggest there are actually more in favour than we can see. This is a ‘null point’ or ‘cancellation’ – argument, designed to wear down resistance to Government Authority. In the face of fact , it is reasonable to suggest that the Coalition will spout anything and everything to suggest the opposite. In many ways, it is already through attrition, [ie. the ‘wearing away’ of resistance] that Government has forced through its odious ‘Welfare Reform Bill..’ However. One has to ask, Why do the Public seem to be aware of this? The answer is likely to be found in the effect of ‘positive propaganda.’ By short-circuiting argument, resistance is lowered: by reinforcing the positive aspect of their Policies (all the while simultaneously underpinning them with the diammetrically opposite: “no-choice but this choice” stratagem, the ‘negative’ arguments [and by extension] – resistance- is also, worn down. In the same way as it is difficult to argue with someone who is (or appears to be), in the face of an aggressive onslaught, calm, contented, smiling: almost affectionate, – by two opposing methods (most of these can be found in handbooks about rearing ‘difficult’ children,) the emotional ‘energy’ within dispute, argument, confrontation and defiance is effectively neutralized. The first is very positive reinforcement, encouragement, warmth and heightened empathy (containing within the ever present threat of censure) while the other is more aloof, unyeilding, persistent and even provocative. Both tend to neutralize opposition – but not in any factual or meaningful way.Another effective way to neutralize opposition is to reduce an opponents argument to absurdity. Recently Employment Secretary Chris Grayling suggested that opposition to the Government’s ‘Workfare’ Scheme had originated from, and was presently being compounded by, activists and members of the Socialist Workers Party. This ‘absurd’ statement – in the face of evidence to the contrary – is an example of ‘reductio ad absurdam.’ In the same way as Health Minister Andrew Lansley has sought to reassure the Public that the NHS Reform Bill is not about Privatization of the Health Service, He has stated that the ‘majority‘ of NHS Staff support the Reform Bill!? He has accused a ‘small minority’ of opposing the Bill – when the facts are that over ninety-percent oppose it and want to see the Bill dropped in its entirety!

Public appearances by Government Ministers are now more carefully staged than ever…

They are in essence mere ‘Public Shows,’ designed to affect observers and audiences, rather than those in the immediate viscinity of the dispute. It is why Political ‘Messages’ can seem so much more reasonable at a distance than close up. Indeed, by appealing to a Television Audience, they are ignoring those in front of them. Now that you know.. perhaps you won’t be fooled so often by TV Political Broadcasts?!

The Grief of A Nation.. (How Government is using DABDA as weapon to push their political agenda forward.)

According to the Five Stages of Grief, they are generally experienced as Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance. They are experienced in different ways by different people. Some take a longer time to pass through each of the stages, others appear to descend through them rapidly and, on the face of it, they appear to recover more quickly. Given that we all experince grief in differing time scales –

How can Government use the grief process to influence Public Behaviour towards its authority?

The answer is, they control the effect of grief through controlling the scale of its effect.That is, by ‘freezing’ their target audience in a particular stage of the process, they can appear to speed up or slow the process down, impacting much more effectively on those intended to feel its effects while deterring others in the wider public from acting against their wishes.

How does it work? An extreme, though entirely reasonable example is to be found during the Nazi Holocaust. Many psychologists, psychiatrists and social sciences experts have postulated theories about why those who were captured, (and in view of their overwhelming numbers,) did not simply attack their captors and escape? The truth is that the Jews were not afforded the time to pass through all the stages of grief. The impact of their new situation (ie being held in a Concentration Camp or Ghetto) was so immediate and so shocking, that they had virtually no time to formulate any kind of resistance. From the very first moment of capture, to the moment of being packed tightly into cattle-trucks and herded together, no-one knowing what was to happen to them (but everyone knowing it was not good) until they were seperated out into Men, Women and Children and subsequently chosen. Again, because no-one actually knew outside of the camps what was the fate of those who were chosen, they could not find time to resist. The break-neck speed at which they were selected, “de-loused” and finally, disposed of, meant that along the whole length of time that they were experiencing the process of grief, at no time were they ever able to complete the process. This in itself might be thought enough, for the grief process interrupted is also denied – except that those who were allowed to live, were plunged beyond the three intitial stages into the final stages of depression and acceptance. Unlike the first three stages, depression and acceptance are almost gravitationally cyclic.. they appear to ‘crush’ the desire to live out of the individual. In the cycle of depression and acceptance, thousands of people can be controlled by only a few well-armed guards. A controlling factor in the cycle of depression and acceptance is fear. Fear of the crematoria, being gassed and fear of seeing their families destroyed was enough to perpetuate the cycle of depression and acceptance. The same methodologies can be found in every despotic regime across the World. Mass murder instils instant fear – that fear ‘short-circuits’ the first three stages of grief.

How does this relate to what Government are doing?

Government attacks a weak minority with propaganda, with their repeated accusations of a ‘hidden’ criminality amongst the group they have identified, and, progressively, dehumanizes those it wishes to affect/punish (the reason is irrelevant.) By attacking, for example, the Disabled, Mentally Disabled and Mentally Ill the Government feeds their progandist assertion that the group they have chosen to victimize is actually responsible for what is happening to them. In the Handbooks of the FBI, CIA, Special Forces Hostage Negotiators there is a simple, yet visceral rule: those who are about to be killed are first dehumanized. This is a indisputable and incontravertible military principle, inasmuch as it is the single most identified ‘justification’ for individual and mass murder. It is regarded by all as “an inevitable conclusion to the dehumanization process.” Through a barrage of Newspaper ‘articles,’ filled with spurious statistics and crypto-scientific ‘evidence’ – through unverifiable, yet ‘reasonable’ anecdotal witness accounts and statements, through a wide variety of Media propaganda and the consistent and continuous vilification in print, televised political events and, of couse, statements read ‘under Parliamentary privelige’ – the dehumanization process is completed. NB. It is said that, by the time the Nazis were able to ‘deal’ with German Jews, a mixture of fear, loathing, hatred and spite culminated in indifference to their suffering – such was the effect of Nazi Propaganda by Newspaper and Radio alone! Compared to the immediacy and power of today’s Media and Internet, the power of Nazi Germany’s Propaganda, pales! Government ‘witch-hunts’ are nothing new – but, one might argue, that the effect of the present Coalition’s wholesale attack on the ‘most vulnerable’ in Society has been (and will yet be in even greater magnitude) ‘catastrophic.’

The stage of grief the Governement appear to be consistently holding the Public in is ‘Anger.’ But not the kind of anger that garners resistance to a cause, nor results in revolution. This stage of anger is being polarized by the repetition of concepts that are almost ‘secret fears,’ within Society. In the same way after the events of July 7th 2005 caused widespread anger and fear within the British Public.Subsequent Government behaviour appeared to ‘ramp-up’ the Public’s emotional response. to the London Bombings. During this time of public grief, the Nation (as a whole – with few apparent dissenters) allowed Parliament to push through a raft of Legislation designed to curb the Civil Rights of British Muslims. Indeed, the most vocal (and possibly hysterical) voices came from the Popular Tabloids! Month after month of anti-Muslim, anti Civil Liberties rhetoric was published again and again and again, until the Public became as “on message” as their paranoid counterpartsin America!

However: the ‘secret fear’ (one might even refer to them as contemporary ‘Urban Myths’) is that everyone who is Unemployed is secretly rich – everyone who is Disabled is secretly wealthier than the Able Bodied and (my personal favourite) everyone who is Unemployed is lazy and lies in bed all day, owns an Iphone, has loads of kids they claim Benefits for, and is lazy!! (just in case you didn’t get it..?)Much of the time those who postulate these urban myths are people who remember what they did – for it is certain, due to the number of people who have hobbies and pastimes that show many levels of unknown skills – laziness is expressed by only a very small and fixed number of people. Yet, the Government’s ‘lie’ and their compounding of those ‘myths’ (eg.”no smoke without fire”) has a significant and deliberately damaging effect!

In any case, it is much more effective to use a series of ‘half-truths’ than it is to use a lie. So instead of deliberate decit, the Authorities will compound urban myths, backing them up with spurious ‘sciences’ (lending credibility and intellectual gravitas to any concept) while stirring up malcontents within the Media and Publishing, resulting in the improper polarization of Public Opinion and the engines thereof.

By ‘trapping’ the Public in a state of continual ‘anger’ – the Government can control the Public’s reactions and direct their energy towards those held ‘responsible’ – irrespective of any over-arching truth.

The Christian/Catholic/Lutheran/Protestant Churches all used the same methods in their purification/indoctrination of the masses.

They used to be called “Witch-hunts” – and their single and only purpose was toburn the Witch!

So you are at home: there has been an incident. Perhaps you were attacked or had something vandalized or stolen? You are pretty shaken up and had to phone the Police, but the Police say they are too busy to deal with your call. Instead, two burly guys arrive with the legend “G4S” emblazoned on the side of their van. You wonder what they want. It is only when you (reluctantly) open the door with the chain on and peer outside – you realise that these two strangers, dressed in ‘official’ looking uniforms and sporting state-of-the-art personal radios and carrying an iPad, are actually there to ‘take your details’ as part of their ‘ongoing’ investigation. At first you think it may be a joke. You are already feeling the after-effects of shock: anger, disbelief, sorrow and the increasingly powerful realisation that you just aren’t as strong or as menacing as you were in your youth: the last thing you wanted was for two second-rate wannabee Police Officers to arrive on your doorstep. You try to be cordial: polite even – in a stiff-upper-lip kind-of-way. You repeatedly slip into the habit of repeating yourself to them and gesturing a little too much, all-the-while trying to reassure yourself that “if the Police actually sent these guys – they must know what they are doing.” All the while knowing in your own mind – “I can’t wait to be rid of these f*cking idiots!”

Apart from the after-effects and the need for endless cups of tea (or something stronger) you become painfully aware that neither of the blokes in front of you has said anything remotely re-assuring, and one of them has even been repeatedly looking at his watch. In short: you just don’t trust them at all! There’s nothing much to add to your ‘statement’ which they hurriedly note on their iPad.When they ask you questions about insurance or if there is anyone they can contact on your behalf – you won’t answer them. Worse still (if you have been burgled) you don’t even want to tell them what has been stolen, how much it was worth, how long you have lived at your home, who else lives with you or anything about locksmiths or someone who can help you to tidy up becauseall you are thinking is ‘THEY ARE NOT THE POLICE, THEY ARE NOT THE POLICE, THEY ARE NOT THE POLICE!!’

It isn’t outsourcing the unimportant bits of Police Work – because it is highly likely that G4S’ Policing-for-profits will become the most corrupting influence upon the Metropolitan Police since Phone Hacking, The Levenson Inquiry, The death of the News of The World and the damaging revelations of Police Corruption through bribes paid (allegedly) by The Sun, The Times, The Mail and Express Newspapers, ie. the entire stable of News International Newspapers and the misleading and highly theatrical ‘testimony’ given to the Commons Select Committee on Press Standards by Rupert Murdoch and his Son!

That is a lot of corruption. If G4S has its way, it is likely to get much, much worse, because if there is one thing we have learned from other Countries –

the moment you start to ‘invent’ other Police Forces,that is the moment Democracy dies.

Whether protesting against Government Actions or against Unfair Legislation, whether showing support for Unions, Causes or Individuals or whether Publicly Acknowledging, Supporting or Protesting the need for the re-opening of a failed Murder Investigation.. The likelihood of Public Protest and Demonstration being answered by an army of unnaccountable and anonymous G4S ‘officers’ is a real possibility and, not being the ‘real’ Police, – who knows where, or how, it would end?

Bearing in mind that David Cameron’s ‘friends’ are all involved, whether it is his self-confessed ‘Diva’ Emma Harrison – formerly of the Workfare ‘Providers’ A4E ( a Company which is now being investigated for Fraud and in which the Government has “invested” almost £100 million pounds of taxpayers money) or Paul Revere of UNUM, the American Health Insurance Company that is currently being swamped by Class Action Suits and which the Justice Department and FBI Fraud Investigators have branded “Institutionally Fraudulent.”

In the case of possible ‘Police Privatization’ Mr Cameron’s ‘friend’ John Shaw of American Security Company G4S (formerly Securicor) who has so-far been awarded £200,000,000 of taxpayers money, is looking to expand his business empire by convincing more Police Authorities to use his ‘services’ – all in the name of cutting costs to Government?..

Actually.. that’s wrong.. because we are paying for G4S by taking money away from the ‘real’ Police!

When the effectiveness of the Police is damaged through Government stupidity: when they rob them of Public Money – in order to pay their ‘cronies’ vast sums for doing the Police’s work. When the only thing that saves the Public from the excesses of ‘private policing interests’ is a bloody Warrant Card – the time has come to draw a line and say “this far: no further: ever!”

Because when a Government decides, without any consultation with the Public, to withdraw ‘Official’ Police Officers and Resources – that is the moment when thugs, criminals and all manner of miscreants can find themselves being ‘officially’ sanctioned to abuse, damage and withold the most basic human and civil right of all!

To answer to only ONE Crown Appointed and Crown Authorized Police Force

On this occasion I say ‘F*ck Cameron and f*ck his Government. All of them!

There was a time when the Conservative Party were dead set against anything like a ‘nanny state.’ A Government of constant meddling and interference in things which had little or nothing to do with Government, but everything to do with Individuals and their “choices.” Yet here in 2012, we are seeing the emergence of something far more prurient and far worse than just hands-on, nosey-parker-type ‘nannying..’ We are on the verge of a Government lead and Ministerially ‘supervised’ “Nappy – State!” It is bad enough that every single aspect of British Life now seems to carry all manner of penalties: whether people are smokers, drinkers, obese and over-eaters or just unfit couch-potatoes, the Government now has its ‘nannies’ to run after and pursuade everyone that their life is not the ‘right’ life to lead and that the State, ie “Nanny” knows best!

All the Government’s ‘helpful’ advice about everything from “quitting smoking” or “reducing drinking” is supposedly aimed at reducing the burden of costs on the NHS, who ultimately have to take care of us all when we fall ill. It is said that those who smoke, drink, eat or take drugs are more likely to fall ill, due to long-term damage to their bodies and the complications that arise from that long-term damage.

One can’t help but ask: What (exactly) happened to individual freedom and choice?

Wasn’t that always the battle-cry of the Tories: wasn’t it their core complaint about ever having a Labour Government in power?

There was a time I was a Party-Animal myself, and though I may not have drank to excess over the whole of my life-time, I certainly made up the short-fall in my teens and twenties. What I could not drink by volume, I made up for in percentage proof! I even ended up in hospital a couple of times needing emergency treatment for alcohol poisoning.Yes, I was very grateful to the NHS then!

In fact, in later months I became aware that (for me) getting continually wasted and the increasingly disgusting task thereafter of ‘sobering up’ was becoming tedious. I became bored with drinking. I also became bored with listening to my friends telling me what ‘great times’ they had while they were drunk (as if I hadn’t heard the same talesevery single weekend for five years?)

It was only when I met the ‘love of my life’ that a Sea-change transformed my world. I never expected to meet someone so young who just captured my heart. We have all had someone similar: some of you will be married to the person you fell for, others may have entered into a committed relationship with him/her (though, as yet perhaps, un-marked by Civil or Church ceremony.) After the birth of my first child (a boy) I felt it was time to make some profound changes to my life. I had no desire to ‘pollute’ my young Son’s world with my smoking.

Smoking was endemic in my family. My Mother smoked: my Father smoked. Under pressure from my peer-group I began smoking a little before my fourteenth birthday – (it was around the same time as I started to play Guitar, discover Girls and become hormonally and emotionally ‘volatile.’) My friends Andre Walters and Ian Hall were perhaps the most vocal about the ‘joys’ and ‘cool’ of smoking. I resisted as long as I could, but one Autumn afternoon in late October 1977 I bought Ten Embassy Number Six and took up a ‘family’ and ‘social’ habit that would last until I was a young man of 24 years.

It only took one alcohol fuelled argument and a sudden, catastrophic loss of self-control to convince me that, should I continue to drink at all, there would be the most unfortunate and tragic results. As I tended to smoke more when I drank alcohol, I decided to try to quit both simultaneously. It was not easy, and my friends and family didn’t make it any easier either! For a while I reduced the number of cigarettes to the bare minimum, or, I would change their nature – by smoking only Menthol cigarettes I thought I would break the habit, but it was futile. The only thing I could do was to quit drinking and smoking altogether!

So that is exactly what I did!

I never smoked again. However, it would be disingenuous to say that I never got drunk again, but in over twenty years I was drunk only twice. The rest of the time I was, by definition, ‘tee-total..’ In fact, there were a number of relationships which broke down and disintegrated because I no longer drank, even to be ‘sociable.’ Instead I took to Diet soft-drinks and bottled waters. Over time I became much fitter and more enthusiastic about life, music and all the spheres of interest I was engaged in. It has to be said that being neither a smoker nor drinker did contradictory things to my love-life. Sex was a much more energetic and exciting experience, but the number of short-term girlfriends seemed to decrease because I was no longer going to bars or clubs or taking part in former activities.

But all of the above was my choice. I was not co-erced into giving those things up and I have few regrets about doing so. The advantages of becoming more physically fit and being able to breathe properly made an enormous difference to my ability to sing. It even affected my guitar-playing, as pacing one’s breathing is necessary in executing difficult or complex musical phrases: in short, I played a lot faster than before and with an accuracy that came from being able to concentrate without need for any ‘props.’

Yet, if I had decided to continue smoking and drinking, I would hope it would be equally seen to be my choice, and not the interfering, busy-body choice of Government. In any Democracy, what people do or do not do in their leisure time should be their own responsibility, and ultimately, any consequences should also be theirs. After all, it is Government and its subsequent legislation which has, all-too-often, actually given rise to social ‘problems’ in the first place. Government used to ‘sponsor’ the manufacture of Cigarettes in the UK and most of Europe. British American Tobacco was one of the most powerful Companies in Britain and had the largest, most powerful lobbying group. In the nineteen-eighties British American Tobacco were accused of trying to create a more addictive form of Tobacco: something that would ensure their revenues (and therefore Government Taxes) were both maintained and increased with a new generation of smokers. It is quite possible that this New Smoking Material found its way into markets in Africa, India and South-East Asia. Tobacco Companies were Advertisers in popular sports – particularily Football, Motor Racing and Horse Racing. In 1998, under Tony Blair’s Labour Government, the first of a series of bans came into force: smoking was no longer to be advertised during prime time television (ie. before the ‘watershed’ of 9pm, this was increased to a general ban on Tobacco Advertising on Television and in Cinemas. Eventually, a full smoking ban in both Public Places and At Work came into force – Clubs and Pubs were included, forcing smokers outside in all weathers.

The present Coalition have taken this idea of having a ‘general ban’ on the activities and pleasures of others, a step further. They have been mooting the possibility of enforcing a ‘minimum price’ for alcohol. (Of course, that does not extend to the kind of alcohols quaffed at Westminster or in the Home Counties) Their main aims seem to be targeted at the ordinary worker and teenagers of drinking-age. This is not the first time a minimum price has been put on alcohol, and it is not the first time the Conservatives have been in the vanguard of ‘Temperance’ initiatives. It is, however, the first time a Conservative/Coalition Government have acted according to principles they previously ruled out. Their dread of the introduction of a ‘Nanny State’ under the aegis of a Labour Administration has become the horror of a “Nappy State” being introduced to kerb (so-called) ‘binge-drinking,’ ‘obesity’ and even being ‘physically unfit.’ Every single adult in Britain is being treated, not merely as a child, but as an ‘infant’ – presumably, an ungrateful infant who doesn’t know what is best for them?

Yes Mr Cameron. We do. And none of it is any of your business. Unless you would like us all to hound the topers, drug-addicts and miscreants in your own Government?

Perhaps it is time you just stopped trying to ‘Nanny’ us all.. or better still, change your own nappy!

Government agrees to drop Benefit Sanctions in Workfare.. really?

I have to say that – this Government are not beyond using sanctions for the SAME/IDENTICAL purpose they intended in the first place! (ie to punish DWP ‘Clients’ for not going onto Workfare) but for other infringements (dress code, shoes not polished, listening to an iPod while ‘working’ etc. etc etc..) or by more circuitous means. For example not filling out their weekly ‘job history’ while working for x,y or z..

Make NO mistake.

IMHO. Cameron is a nightmare, in so far as He is likely to be found to be – and the evidence of his wilfully ignorant and dismissive behaviour towards ALL those who oppose him and his Government,bears this thought out – a ‘Malignant Narcissist‘. In many ways He is perhaps the most institutionally dangerous PM we have ever had – because no-one voted ‘for’ him as such, yet He has destructively and unapologetically ploughed into every single aspect of the infrastructure of the Country. The Coalition is headed by TWO malicious personalities. Nick Clegg is the archetypal ‘appeaser’ – the “good Cop” persona – but He too is Narcissistic – the difference is that He is also arguably, charismatic. Between the pair, they complete one intensely egotistical and fanatical “two-headed Dog..” Nick Clegg is so enamoured with the ‘power’ he has (literally) been “afforded” through the Coalition, that He will say anything and do anything to keep it. David Cameron on the other hand “knoweth He hath, but a short time..” and – because He is riddled with Class bigotry and certain ‘types’ of Racism – He is determined and obstinate enough to ensure it is HIS Government who finally bring down the ‘edifice’ (as He and his Inner Court perceive it) of Socialism: breaking apart forever the foundation stones of that which “The Working Class” depends for its security. ie. The Welfare State and National Health Service. If you want to see a vision of the future under this tawdry little man and his cronies – look to wretched America. A land now filled with invisible, stateless and vagabond people – all of whom have simply been abandoned without any kind of support. THAT my friends IS the lynchpin of “Thatcherism” in all its undiluted fury: and, until the bitch that bore the epithet “There is no such thing as Society” is six feet under, these Political and Ideological grotesques will continue to uproot innumerable British families and their impoverished children in the name of ‘Austerity.’ How strange that the ONLY ones who seem safe from this cull of Services and Civil Support Organisations (apart from the City of London and The Royal Family/Civil List) are those who presently inhabit Parliament- on ALL sides of The House? Yet THEY have NOT taken a single CUT in salary or expenses: yet they still protest, “We are ALL in this TOGETHER?”

Perhaps it is time the Government themselves showed some REAL austerity.. and cut their own throats!Just my opinion of course!

Fear and Loathing about ‘Workfare…’

On the face of it, the idea of ‘Workfare’ or rather, the British equivalent of an American Welfare Policy seems benign. Even positive and perhaps forward looking. Yet, as with so many of the Coalition’s ‘Policies’ scratching beneath the polished and all-too benevolent veneer and one can see a great many disadvantages and opportunities for abuse of the new work placement ‘system.’

There is a current argument about what exactly is ‘Workfare for, and whom does it benefit?’ On the one hand the Government is adamant that it is the best way of encouraging young people ‘off Benefits’ and into the ‘World of Work.’ Their proposals included a few weeks of unpaid work (that is, work for benefits and nothing more) at any one of a number of big businesses who had signed contracts with Government to provide ‘work experience’ for up to (but not exclusively) eight weeks.

However.

In the original Policy Document was a clause which suggested that anyone who either refused to take up ‘Workfare’ or who left their Workfare placement after a short period of time should be ‘sanctioned’ (ie. lose part or all of their benefits..) This clause has, mysteriously, disappeared in the face of massive opposition to Workfare from all manner of sources. It has been branded ‘forced labour’ and ‘modern slavery,’and many of those who signed up to Workfare are now having second thoughts: no-one, it seems wants to be associated with any accusation of having people doing a full day’s work, (the equivalent of every other paid worker) for just their benefits. Moreover, the Companies who are now withdrawing from the scheme are citing that they do not want to be responsible for people losing their benefits while working for them. The public seem to be split in their opinions. On the one hand they can see no reason for Workfare to fail, as the aims seem laudable and, in this time of increasing austerity and unprecedented growth in unemployment, it seems reasonable to encourage young men and women to take up some work experience just to have something positive on their CV’s. Yet their primary concern is that the implementation of ‘Workfare’ and it’s hidden consequences (particularly Government’s deception about sanctions against DWP clients and the payment of vast sums of Public Money to private companies like A4E et al) have lost public confidence and trust in the scheme.

Although the scheme is not altogether damaged beyond repair, the Government are at a huge disadvantage because they have deliberately deceived the Public and the Unemployed Youth who had already been informed of the consequences of non-compliance. Employment Minister Chris Grayling MP has been incandescent over the accusation that Workfare is little more than ‘Slave Labour,’ and has blamed a small number of Anti-Capitalist Radicals and Members of the Socialist Workers party for an internet campaign which has, so far, managed to influence a huge number of withdrawn Companies.

Honesty is not Our best Policy

Seeking to trivialize the views of a much larger number of internet supporters of the Anti-Workfare Campaign, Grayling has attempted to air-brush out the clauses from the Workfare Scheme which had sanctions attached.

Such an action is hardly the act of an honest Government Minister.

It is testament to the Government’s ineptitude and the arrogant imposition of terms and conditions which undermined the architecture of their own policy.

There may also be a more fundamental flaw in the Workfare Scheme – and that is its ‘practical application.’

A lot of comments have been made about the Government wishing to ‘instil a Work Ethic’ into today’s youth. Presumptions have been made about how many of those who are NEETS (Not in Employment, Education or Training Schemes) spend their time.

Much has been made about how lazy or indolent the Youth of today are.. but isn’t this as unfair to them as saying “exams are getting easier?” More unfair in fact?

Employment and Pensions Minister Ian Duncan Smith went further than suggesting the youth of today are lazy. He suggested they all suffer from ‘merely dreaming about ‘X Factor’ fame, instead of being realistic and doing an ordinary job.’ The fact that this kind of assumption is probably par-for-the-course to a Public School/Oxford Educated man who probably doesn’t truly know what real work is anyway, distracts from the underlying themes of his Coalition Party’s snobbery and their attempts to re-affirm the Class System which has been in decline since the Second World War. In a single statement, IDS has underpinned the real ‘Ethic’ behind Workfare, The Welfare Reforms and the Government’s cuts to Public Services – the reinforcement of the ‘Class System’ and the over-arching supremacy of Government and The State.

Quite apart from the sweeping generalization that all of today’s Youth are simply ‘hopeless dreamers’ the idea that there is any honour in work for its own sake is yet another plank of a backward looking, sentimental and utopian Government who just do not know how to view the population of Britain in a rational, balanced or unbiased way. Anyone who is a parent, if asked quietly, calmly with no hint of interrogation will freely say something like “I don’t want my kids to have the life I did – I want something better for them!” Examined more closely, what one generally finds is that a household where both parents work or worked in manufacture, heavy industry or some arena requiring hard, physical ‘graft’ they will not want their children doing the same type of job as them. Yet most (if not ALL) of the proposed jobs in Workfare are menial and will neither provide ‘training’ nor experience in any significant or useful way. The ‘jobs’ offered to DWP ‘clients’ appear to be a modern form of ‘treadmill..’ Repetitious, boring and without any hope of improvement – yet underscored with ‘sanctions’ designed to take away benefits which are, for most, a matter of simple survival. Workfare jobs are simply not designed to be “real employment” in the sense that they are paid at the same rate (the rate is rarely above the ‘Minimum Wage’ anyway!) Prime Minister David Cameron’s boast that 50% of those who have taken up Workfare voluntarily have been taken on in full-time employment is absurd.. and yet no-one: not the Media, Press nor any Public body has asked the Government to “prove it!”

Those whose parents work or worked in the administrative, professional or military arenas tend to have a more liberal approach leaving the ‘choice’ of career to their children, yet perhaps guiding them onto paths that will ultimately benefit them. Workfare here might seem like ‘slumming it’ – something which is only likely to be tolerated as long as it offers something more beyond repetition.

Those whose parents are, for various reasons, rich and influential tend either to be completely ‘hands-on’ influencing every aspect of their lives or are largely ‘hands-off’ believing that their progeny will find “their own niche..” Workfare here will have little or no impact of any kind, and is unlikely to be required.

Those whose parents are unemployed or whom have never been able to secure full-time employment tend to be cynical and hostile to anyone outside of their immediate community from having any influence over their children. They are also more prone to either closing themselves down and accepting that they will never work, (this has been propagandized by the Coalition as “living off benefits”..) or become so resentful about their state that they embark on criminal or potentially antisocial forms of subsistence. Here, Workfare will simply be experienced as unfair, cheap labour and slavery/drudgery. Some may see criminal opportunities, while others may idealize the situation – desperate to be accepted (because they are desperate for real work.) but unable to face the possibility that no work may come of it. These are the most vulnerable groups – and yet they are a fraction of those Workfare is aimed at.

For this group, their benefits are their only life-line. Cuts here are experienced immediately and catastrophically…

Again. Grayling, IDS et al say they want to help people off benefits and into work – yet there are few jobs, the economy is in free-fall, there are continuous waves and tides of recession and zero-growth in the UK, yet, in the face of rising unemployment, increasing numbers of redundancies resulting in the greatest loss of tax revenues, the Government has imposed the most swingeing Welfare Benefits cuts in living memory. How can the Government be helping anyone when they are plunging so many into poverty?

Put simply, we have to ask: why is the Government (including Ed Milliband’s Labour Party who also voted for the Welfare Reforms) making the poor much, much poorer?

This Government has even brought in the schoolyard paradigm of putting fingers-in-the-ears-while-shouting-“La,La,La -NOT LISTENING!” such is their panic about not getting their ‘reforms’ through intact. It is almost a matter of showing what they are made of, rather than addressing the serious needs of NHS and Welfare Reform. The unedifying spectacle of the Health Minister Andrew Lansley and the Works and Pensions Minister Ian Duncan-Smith churning out the same rhetoric again and again, defying any ‘public’ views or opinions (even from the Professional Classes) and complaining that, in spite of appearances – everyone is behind the Reforms, is both tiresome and pointless! Innumerable defeats in the Lords and one amendment after another being suggested, only to be told that the opinions of the House of Lords too, count for nothing, because the Government is determined to push through the Reform Bills anyway using a little known and little used device called “Financial Privelige” Preventing the Reform Bills from being altered or amended due to ‘Budget Restraints.’

However: recently a Conservative blogger wrote that “Three prominent Cabinet Members said that the NHS Reform Bill will have the same effect as the Poll Tax!” He continued with “my sources (ie the three Cabinet Ministers) say the NHS Reform Bill should be dropped.. as should Mr Lansley..”

No sooner had this blog been posted than the furore began. Temper tantrums by both the Prime Minister David Cameron and Health Minister Andrew Lansley (who refused point-blank to answer any questions or give any response to the blog,) seemed to overflow. Cameron said that the NHS Refroms would be ‘pushed through’ – in spite and in the face of substantial, mounting opposition. Most of the Professional Healthcare Organizations, their Heads and the Chief Unions of the NHS Nursing, Medical and Auxiliary Staff had already declared that the NHS Bill should be dropped immediately, saying it was “unfit for purpose..”

At this stage, it could be easily argued that Cameron and the whole of the Coalition are simply seeking to circumvent Democracy. But constantly defining their policies as ‘cruel to be kind’ they patronize and devalue protest and opposition. This is not merely children refusing to do their homework or go to bed on time – this is a Nation, speaking in different tongues but with the same message. Cameron would be wise to listen.

The message is this.

The supposed need for austerity: the management of Public Funds and the probable reform of some established services is not any reason for you or your Coalition to attempt to ride roughshod over the Will of the People. We are not a Nation that “does not know its own mind”: and we do not need to be patronized by the likes of you either! You are not a “worker” – you are a diletante, a pen-pusher, an idle dreamer and and a Taxpayer/Benefits drain like few others – save the Civil List and some Peers. You wouldn’t know ‘real’ work if it punched you in the mouth! You pretend you know what work is, but, considering your priveliged and altogether ‘elitist’ background – how could you possibly know what real work is like? That said, the whole of your Government is equally out-of-touch with what the Public thinks – mainly, because beyond the next election – WE don’t EXIST!!

So. You and the Coalition have not been given the right to treat us with contempt – no matter what you might think! The trust afforded you and the Coalition, is totally dependent on you ALL ‘listening!’ and taking our views and opinions seriously.

Don’t continue on with your ridiculous “delusions of grandeur” supposing you are a feted “Caeser” – you are a mere Bureaucrat, a ‘Caretaker’ until a real leader shows him/herself and you are not inexpendable.

Austerity is no reason to suppose you can use Draconian or Autocratic measures or circumvent or deny Democracy. This isn’t China David! Not everyone in this Country is asleep either : and not everyone is afraid!

Lastly: What goes around comes around – and those you impoverish now will eventually assist in doing the same to you.And you have no ‘coping skills’ – especially when you are separated from your other, equally contemptible chums.

The next time you rise in the House of Commons to try to lie about how much the Public, Professionals or some other faceless ‘quotient’ support you – remember that you cannot control the Media, Newspapers or the BBC all the time and once your lies are found out – like Thatcher – you will be driven out of office..forever.

You cannot ignore US!

However, perhaps it is better to simply let certain ‘facts’ speak for themselves. David Cameron welcomed Unum into the infrastructure of the Country, even though Unum (a Private American Medical Insurance Company) are in the process of facing innumerable Class Action Lawsuits for Fraud and Deception – among the many accusations which have been made against Unum is that they ‘systemmatically defrauded people out of both Insurance Claims and Insurance Entitlememnts. Many of the Fraud Investigations are being conducted by Federal Authorities as Unum has allegedly carried out the same offences across the United States. Yet David Cameron has welcomed Unum.. Why? Perhaps because if the NHS Reform Bill went through without Amendments, the likes of Unum would be free to defraud British Taxpayers, Workers and Professionals as well as the Disabled and Mentally Ill, wholly protected by the Prime Minister’s ‘guarantees’ (pledges that one would hardly consider using as lavatory paper, let alone trust the printed words!) Many more parasitic and morally dubious Medical Insurance Companies would find Britain becomes a “Free-for All” market – and in a single stroke, the NHS would be finished, broken up and turned into Private Hospitals and Healthcare Centers with all that entails. The biggest joke is that WE have already paid for the WHOLE of the NHS Infrastructure (its buildings and services etc) and WE would be handing it over to PRIVATIZATION in the SAME stupid way as the Utilities (remember them?) BT (the most parasitic organisation in modern Britain) and British Rail which, under endless numbers of private concerns has become the worst and most expensive Public Transport system in the whole of Europe! The State run system might have been poor, but the private system is just beyond useless! In the space of three years – utilities companies (Gas and Electricity) have put up their prices by over 200% Recently some of the Utilities have dropped their prices by, up to 15%, but this has often been recouped immediately, because although they have dropped their electricity prices – they have maintained cripplingly high Gas prices. They know that it doesn’t matter which service they are providing, whether Gas or Electricity- because even if they ‘appear’ to drop one price, a small rise in the other will immediately cancel-out any supposed ‘cut.’

NB: Two weeks after Gas and Electricity prices were cut, Water charges were increased!

The Government say they can do nothing.

The Welfare Reform Bill took a hammering by the Lords too, yet their Amendments were voted down and the brute force of the device of Financial Privelige was imposed. Many of the aspects of the Welfare Reform Bill are just perceived as ‘nasty.’ They have no real purpose except to show the hubris and insolence of untrammeled Powers of State. The inability for Government to ‘show’ any proof of the Public Support the Coalition protests they ‘enjoy’ in the Welfare Reform Bill leaves many Charities and Social Services convinced that many of the enactments within the Bill are wholly unnecessary and speak to the abuse of the legislative process by the Minister for Work and Pensions – Ian Duncan-Smith.

Both of the Reform Bills before Parliament are instruments of the State, showing it’s contempt and insolence towards the Public. Discriminating in the Press and Media between ‘Worthy’ and ‘Unworthy’ – ‘Deserving’ and ‘Undeserving’ – yet they, as the biggest parasites in the British Economy – who neither toil, nor build, create nor serve – are truly undeserving of either trust or obedience. The Coalition are a cabal of autocrats, deluded Public Schoolboys with a penchant for “sticking it to the Oiks!” perhaps their panic and incapability is worthy of them being assessed by ATOS?

Who knows – perhaps they would ALL be placed in Work Related Activities or Workfare?

But, so-far, they have never taken a cut in Salary or their expenses: in fact, last year they were increased – even though they are ALL Public Workers!?

Their Pension Entitlements have not been reduced or affected in the way MILLIONS of Public Sector Workers have And they have already been handed a “take it or leave it” choice by Government.

NOT ONE MINISTER OR LORD HAS SERVED HIS FULL TERM IN PRISON FOR FRAUD!! NOT EVEN LORD FRAUD.. SORRY.. LORD FREUD HIMSELF – A KEEN ADVOCATE OF ALL THE “REFORMS!”

In fact, it is LORD FREUD – after he was released only weeks into a lengthy Prison sentence, who has been a vocal and loyal supporter of the Coalition.

Not that there is any corruption associated with Lord Freud. Nor any doubt about his probity. Nor any concern about his conflict of interests, due to his early release from wandsworth!?

Nota Bene

I am not a member of the Labour Party and never have been, but that fact has recently given me a perspective about the internal ‘reformation’ under the aegis of the present Labour ‘Leader – Ed Milliband MP. I have to confess that I find Ed Milliband unappealing as a prospective Prime Minister. He seems to have a largely ‘cardboard: cut-around-the-dotted-line’ kind of personality which translates badly into any potential Ministerial post. I am not impressed by him or his brother – David Milliband: a former Minister in Gordon Brown’s Cabinet.

I guess I just don’t care for the need for ‘personality’ driven Politics. I really do not like the ‘Big Brother’ or ‘X Factor’ kind of Policy making decisions that are made in the Labour Party either, and the lack of serious, adult, grown-up debate (even in the face of disagreement within the rank and file) makes me think that the Labour Party is simply becoming a ‘club’ for a different kind of ‘Politics.’ With the distinct (and some might say utterly dismaying) lurch to the Right and Centre-right of Political Ideology, I might propose that the true and foundational principles of “grassroots Socialism” within the Labour Party, are already long dead.

The retreat from Socialism.

Instead, there is a deepening and entrenched conceit about the concept of the Tony Blair/Gordon Brown “New Labour” movement. A conceit that is as erroneous as it is absurd! Little by little, the likes and dislikes of the upper echelon of the Labour Party hierarchy have picked apart the fabric of what was Left-Wing Ideology and Socialist Values, replacing it with a much ‘watered-down’ set of values and ideas. Gone are the forthright Political Advocates of the Socialist Manifestos. For now , in their place, newly installed like some rogue software which obliterates every reference, however tacet, to “Socialism” the ‘grey-men and women’ have appeared to drag the Party into the largely unoffensive, bland, mild and all-pleasing ‘centre’ of political thought. Every aspect of the Socialist identity of the Labour Party has been air-brushed out of existence. The ‘failure’ of Communism was equated with the failure of Socialism – yet this is a redundant notion, because not one of the Communist States had ‘Socialism’ at its heart. All of the Communist States were, ‘totalitarian.’ They were intended to become Socialist before they became Totalitarian under the likes of eg. Stalin, Chairman Mau and the thousand other despots that followed. The true Socialist identity, explored in Marx’s – Das Kapital never saw the light of day. Even the famed ‘Little Red Book’ which formed the framework and architecture of Chinese Communism only ever used Socialism as a ‘mantra’ with which to pursuade their ‘Comrades’ that they had the Country’s interests at heart. They too fell under the shadow of totalitarianism. The Socialist dream was lost long ago, driven out of existence by regime after regime. Further ‘demonized’ by America and Britain: Socialism has always and inevitably equated with Communism – even though the likes of Marx, Trotsky and Engels never envisaged the form their Ideological Manifesto would take in quite that way.

All the way through the McCarthy “witchhunts” where Americans from all walks of life were accused and denounced as ‘Communists’ – there was a firm, unyeilding and insolent belief that anyone who agreed with the ideas of Socialism had to be a Communist. The American Senate Committee on Communist Activities had no time for the niceties of discernment or ideological discrimination. The McCarthy period resulted in hundreds of thousands of Americans being ‘blacklisted’ for Jobs, Loans and Mortgages. Prominent Public Denouncements (where neighbours, friends and work colleagues were “encouraged” by Government Organizations like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (F.B.I) to give evidence against anyone they believed to be Communist or who had Communist sympathies. This became more wretched as wholly innocent people were accused before a Grand Jury: – unable to defend themselves from the prurience of the questions repeatedly asked and disallowed from being able to use any kind of Public Defenders: ) The accused included Hollywood Stars, Playwrights, Artists, Authors, Intellectuals, Scientists and even Military Staff. The phrase “Reds under the bed” became coined after several high profile trials for Treason were prosecuted. The American Government saw communist spies everywhere.

There has been a similar attitude in Britain. The fear of covert or secret communist organizations springing up under the guise of Socialist Union movements bordered on paranoid delusion. The members of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament were regarded as Communist sympathizers, because they were against the siting of American Nuclear Missile Bases in Britain. The campsite at Greenham Common USAF base, populated mainly by women and students was regularly watched and patrolled by MI5, American Intelligence and other Departments of the Police. However. It was during the Thatcher Government’s first term of Office that several self-styled ‘Socialist’ Parties and various branches of Labour Unions were infiltrated by members of MI5 and Special Branch – Undercover Division. At the height of the Miner’s Strikes, these infiltrators became ‘Agents Provocateurs’ stirring up strife within the rank and file of Miner’s Unions while simultaneously using ‘divide and rule’ – separating out those Miner’s who wanted to go back to work, from those who wished to perpetuate the strike. Even though the number of miner’s who wanted to break the strike was very small, the Government and National Coal Board used all their power to protect the returning Miners. Thatcher had used the Police as her Political Army and had also brought MI5 into disrepute by using its services against the Country’s Citizens. By the end of the strike, Thatcher had passed surveillance orders on all of the Union Leaders and most of the Members of the Opposition including Ex-Prime Minister Michael Foot MP

How we ended up with so many people on ‘Permanent’ Welfare (1988 – 2009)

It is important to understand too that, for several decades after the Miner’s Strike – and indeed the other strikes which took place throughout the United Kingdom – that an unknown number of Union Officials and their famiies were ‘blacklisted’ from any kind of employment. There are many families now who have lead a life of penury and impoverishment because of Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet and their involvement and collusion with the infamous Economic League of Great Britain: whose actions, prevented ordinary people from ever working.The anonymous faces behind this systemmatic illegality are generally believed to have disseminated their intentional disempowerments through the structure and membership of the Masonic Order. The Economic League of Great Britain protests that it ‘disbanded’ in 2009 and never blacklisted anyone (to their knowledge).. That still means that some people were somehow prevented from working (and therefore spent their entire lives on Benefits) Existing on State hand-outs for over twenty years.

It is well to note that not one former Minister from either Margaret Thatcher or John Major’s Government was ever accused or prosecuted for ‘blacklisting’ former Trades Union Members or the members of their Families. The ‘blacklists’ have either been destroyed or are kept under lock and key at Conservative Central Offices in London. Even the BBC was involved in the act of ‘blacklisting’ certain individuals and their families: though there is little evidence to support the accusation now.

The Break up of the U.S.S.R

On the 9th November 1989 the Berlin wall came down. Russian Communism was at an end. The break-up of the Soviet States and their fight for Independence from Russian control gathered momentum and soon resulted in the declaration of The Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia formally breaking away from the [now ‘former’] U.S.S.R

The Whitehouse soon announced that it was the “end of Socialism as a failed Political Ideology.’ The response from the UK echoed much the Americans said. The dawning of this new age sent the British Labour Party into a search for, or the need to find, it’s “identity” – now that Countries, Governments and Authorities, once branded as being ‘Socialist,’ had come to an undignified and chaotic end. I believe at this point in time, the Labour Party tried to distance itself from the past (especially the break-up of former Soviet unity) and tried to find new political ground to justify its existence..

The Reformation of The Party – New Labour is born..

The formation, or rather – one might argue, the “reformation” of the Labour Party under Tony Blair focused less on the core values or the intrinsically’ Socialist ideology’ of the Party and more on its presentation and public interaction. New Labour dispensed with most of the ‘idealism’ and concentrated more on ‘popularity.’ The 1997 New Labour Manifesto contained few of the core policies which many of the rank and file might have expected, and many of policies were deliberately designed to rid Labour of the “tax and spend” image they had been constantly associated with, throughout the Leadership years of Neil Kinnock (and the late John Smith MP QC.) Tony Blair benefitted greatly from the length of time it took for Labour to, once more, become a ‘credible’ and more importantly, ‘electable’ Political Party.

It was the Tabloids what Won it!

However, it should not be forgotten that much of the opposition to Labour becoming a Government, (even before the advent of Tony Blair) came from the Press: especially the Newspapers belonging to Rupert Murdoch. Through the editorials (especially the Front Pages, which seemed to be constantly ‘available’ for anti-Labour propaganda) of News International – and especially the Tabloids namely: The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express and the News of The World, in whose stead the Labour Party came under a continuous and increasingly hostile barrage of abuse and witheringly critical propaganda. The day after the Conservatives won a second term in office, the front page of The Sun boasted “It was US what won it!” The Empire of Rupert Murdoch had shown its power. Labour could find little solace in the fact that they had not ‘lost’ the Election – they had simply been kept from ever being considered for Government through the collusion and vitriolic anti-Labour propaganda of Tory Central Office with News International’s Chief Editors.

Re-branding the Labour Party was, perhaps, the single ‘master-stroke’ – yet even then, the Party was being financed and supported through the donations of Unions: some of whom had vested interests in some of the older policies finding their way into the present manifesto. Much of New Labour was still ‘Old Labour,’ : though the Party was no longer being controlled by the stalwarts. Tax and Spend Policies were outlawed, the Government would not make manifesto promises about policies it could not safely deliver in its first term of office. The New Labour Party stretched out their hands to much more Middle-Income/Middle-Class families: aiming most of their electoral policy directives at what was called the “aspiration generation” and not the usual lower paid, working class/unemployed or those on benefits. In many ways it might have been thought a slap-in-the-face for those in the Labour Party who were Working Class, but the promise of a New Labour Government meant there was always the hope that those who were passed over in the first instance would then gain through further policies and changes to existing manifesto pledges.

The Icy Winds of Disenfranchisement.. How the Unions were ignored.

If there was a desire for such things it was soon extinguished through introduced reforms and enactions which altered the lives of millions of unemployed and disabled/sick. It seemed that Labour would no longer look after the very people who built the Labour Party. Unions and their members also felt the cold chill of realisation that ran through them, blowing in from the now, Arctic Winds of the newly installed Labour Government. It must have beena shock to find that many of the Employment and Health Tribunal Laws they wanted to see reinforced were actually ignored, whereas more emphasis was paid to Part-Time Workers and their rights and entitlements. The Unions were left at the sidelines, struggling to understand the meaning of what was going on, and what it would mean to them. Every tenet of the Socialist Idea was overturned or watered down so thoroughly that it became hardly recognizable.

The Labour Party – New Labour was parting company with its fundamental principles and foundational membership. The Working Classes were deliberately marginalized while New labour set itself up as a ‘Centre-Left’ party, with occasional leanings towards Thatcherite Policies. There was no wholesale re-Nationalization of the Utilities, BT or the Railways. Those who expected any kind of Socialist u-turn were in for dissappointment. As far as Blair and the Cabinet were concerned, they had become effectively ‘divorced’ – not only from Socialist Ideology, but also responsibility for those on Welfare, the Unemployed (beyond the age of 30) and those involved in Manufacture or Heavy Industry. In effect, those people who were born before the Thatcher Yeras were immediately cut-off. They were, in New Labour’s eyes – “irrelevant.” Government efforts were centred upon Youth Unemployment, Working Mothers and Families. It has to be said that many improvements were made in the General Population. The introduction of a ‘Minimum Wage’ did not cause the Commercial ‘armageddon’ that the Tories had given dire warnings about. Child-subsidy was introduced to allow Women who wanted to work, to pay for, Day-Care and Creches. Welfare increases were tied to the Retail Price Index, which meant that benefits did not lag behind any adverse changes in the economy. Although the domestic economy was the main priority for Government, the International stage claimed far more time and, as a consequence, the Country’s economy was always in the shadow of International Affairs. The War in Iraq, the “Dodgy Dossier,” and the untimely death of the Government’s Chemical Weapons Inspector – Dr David Kelly, did more damage to the Prime Minister than anyone in New Labour might have guessed. It was clear during the Inquiry into The War in Iraq, that Tony Blair had become a liability as Prime Minister. Wrangling over when He would finally step down, handing the Premiership to his Deputy Gordon Brown damaged the image of Government and the Party to such an extent that the Country seemed unwilling to allow Gordon Brown to simply ‘take over’ the role of Prime Minister.

The Economy Collapses

In 2008 the United States, the European Union and Britain were plunged into the worst economic crises since the twenties Great Depression or the Hyperinflation of the nineteen thirties. At first, the collapse of Lehman Brothers and Fanny-Mae was blamed solely on the sub-prime mortgage lenders market, which overnight had gone bust. The backlash was immediate and catastrophic. Northern Rock, Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds Insurers of London and a substantial clutch of other banks who were all tied into the International Money Markets, suddenly felt the ground move from under their collective and individual feet, they needed an immediate and vast taxpayer bail-out, which virtually emptied the Government’s coffers. Gordon Brown was in the eye of the storm and while his European neighbours suddenly found themselves almost bankrupted overnight – he issued the release of funds to bail out all the Banks thus far affected. The Stock Exchanges went into free fall as billions were wiped from share values. Some European Union countries were so badly affected they found themselves floundering, tied to massive debts and unable to respond to the crises. Iceland, owing (among others) the UK millions of pounds simply shut its doors. Their Lanski Banksi stopped trading immediately and refused to make arrangements to pay their massive debts. Portugal, Ireland (Eire) Greece and Spain found themselves staring into an economic abyss: worse still, their debt was not going to be measured in mere billions of Euros, but in fractions of their Gross Domestic Product. The Euro itself was in peril and fluctuating, but downward depressed markets and the instant devaluation of the Euro were anything but helpful contributing factors. The European Central Bank struggled to take in the enormity of the crises, while Germany and France tried in vain to reassure the markets and global economies. Many of the beneficial and transformative policies and measures Gordon Brown took to lessen the impact of the crises have been long forgotten – drowned out by the political posturing and rhetoric of the [then] opposition Conservative and Liberal Democratic Parties. Yet it is true to say that, had Gordon Brown not acted as quickly and robustly as he did, shoring-up the failing banks, the economic crises in Britain could have become runaway bankruptcy and catastrophic economic damage which would have taken much, much longer to stabilize.

The Entirely Fascist Coalition: Labour moves to the Centre Right…

However. In a short period of time Gordon Brown lost the support of the electorate and an election was called. With no overall majority for any of the main parties a “Coalition” was formed between the Conservatives and Lib-Dems. The Labour party shrank into a leadership contest where both ex-Minister David Milliband (an MP in the Cabinet of Gordon Brown) and his largely unknown brother Ed Milliband, fought for the Labour Party’s supremacy. The selection of Ed Milliband as Labour Leader was a mere sideshow to the increasing pantomime that was the beginning of both ‘Austerity Measures’ (in certain cases, including the imposition of “caretaker Governments” ) and the ‘European Bailouts:’ which, for countries like Greece and Spain would mean the difference between ‘coping’ and National Bankruptcy. Even when the Labour Party had managed to form an ‘Opposition’ – ready to take on the newly formed Coalition Government, they were still deadlocked about which parts of the electorate they would ‘actively’ support. In the following months, and in view of the depth and savagery of the imposed Welfare Cuts (made under the guise of austerity) it was not going to be those at the bottom rung of the social dependency ladder. The Labour Party had sold itself for the promise of electoral tolerance. Ed Milliband soon revealed that He and His Labour Party would not be in the business of “protecting the most vulnerable.” His eyes are firmly on the Middle Classes and He has even made a disgraceful distinction between those He and his Party believe are ‘Deserving’ and ‘Undeserving.’ Choosing to follow the Coalition mantras, and, in one movement has lurched the whole of the Labour Party into the Centre Right of the Political Spectrum.

As such, we are, today, in the hands of an entirely Fascist Government – Incredibly, being opposed by Fascists and supported through the politics of intolerance and State and Press-led revenge against … who?

Those who are actually responsible for the Economic Collapse?

No.

But Victims all the same….

So..?

Is the Labour Party dead?

Is it the end of the Labour Party?

YES.

And when there is no effective opposition to Draconian Policies and Government.. it can only lead to disaster!